Over 20-years ago, the American Psychological Assc. voted at one of their annual conferences that Homsexuality

Question

is not a mental disorder, or a choice, but rather a sexual orientation established at birth. Since that time, they have also voted to designate other sexual desires as orientations instead as a mental disorder/choice. These include attractions to both sexes, to animals, and to children. The last one was done at their San Diego Conference (2001) and was controversial. With homosexuals demanding equal rights, would not also providing the same rights to the other orientations, be still endorsing discrimination? Do you fear that if homosexuals gain the same rights as heterosexuals, that it would lead us down a path that we may not wish to be taking? Will we need to say that certain orientations have no rights, period, and that if one day we learn what part of DNA causes the difference in sexual orientations, that it should be treated as a genetic disorder, with corrective measures taken?

This is a highly controversial subject, but one that needs to be considered.

Answer 1

much as i would like to answer your question as professionally as i can, i am quite overwhelmed by the series of questions you've bombarded to my brain it got clogged. from what i've observed about current events from my end here, we're so anxious and careful about making politically correct statements and notions about any entity that has rights. so be it. i don't have fears about homosexuals, my only wish is that we'd all live altogether in a harmonious and cooperative way despite our differences in orientation.

Answer 2

I think that it is a huge leap from acknowledging homosexuality as a genetically based orientation to endorsing pedophilia. The latter is a crime regardless of whether it is committed by a heterosexual or homosexual. Social and ethical values will never allow abhorrent acts to be excused, mitigating circumstances or not.
An abusive childhood is not a defense for an abusive parent or husband. An alcoholic can not be excused from murder because of some genetic predisposition toward alcohol. No, I do not think that genetic or environmental issues will provide license to commit violent and anti-social acts. There are also hospital wards for the criminally insane, and that's where I think borderline cases would end up.

Answer 3

even if they did find a gene that made people gay why cant people accept that someone is different.. why would you want to mutate someones genes?? thats just awful!! Would you try to get someone who wrote with their left hand instead of their right into "therapy" bcz they are the minority? etc etc you see where im going with this... where would you draw the line???
If someone isnt causing any harm to others why should anyone care who they are attracted to, what gives someone the power to judge someone and punish them for who they are?
As for animals welll its very unconventional and of course it would make most people feel a lil uneasy sick but well if you really think about it as long as the animal is not abused or forced into it well i may be revolted but then why should i punish them cz im revolted unless they are hurting the animal, forcing the animal??
so as far as animals and children are concerned the line starts to became more and more fuzzy bcz it no longer involves two consenting adults but children and animals who do not necessarily have a say or understanding of what is happening or who may feel abused and an adult has more power and control...
Thats why i think there are laws against child molesters and against beastiality and why there should be no laws against homosexuals...
live and let live i say..
if you dont like homosexuality no-one is forcing you to watch or be friends with them, just like no-one is forcing you to be gay, you dont have to agree with it ...
so why should someone else who is harimg no-one be punished just cz you dont like it??


check this out:
http://www.petertatchell.net/psychiatry/aversion.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3258041.stm

(and before ppl say that the bbc study of 78% "cured" is true, well in my opnion that study only shows how scared they became and had to say to the psychs that they were cured bcz if they didnt say that then the psychs would only keep them there longer!)

Answer 4

I really don't see the problem.

If men are allowed to marry women, and men can marry men, and women can marry women, what else is there besides animals and that's just wrong. There NO way that animal can even understand the concept of marriage, let alone express wanting to marry a human being. It shouldn't even be a topic of discussion, it's just ludacris.

Answer 5

An interesting question. If I learnt pre-nataly that my child was going to be gay, and could have my wife take a pill that would change that, I would ask her to take it.

I think growing up gay must be extremely difficult, and I wouldn't want it, or the broader problems associated to homosexuality, to be lumped on my kid.

Answer 6

be aware of these people they are after your kids...

there is one thing you can do that with a grown up but not with kids...they will think that they are abused...because you are exploiting a children because of your orientation... what about the freedom of the young child...

Answer 7

Homsexuality in my opinion should not be permited. it is breaking the laws of nature and laws of sex. if they gain equal rights we would have more laws and less respect for oneself. women should be women and men should be men.